On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 3:59 PM, Connor Lane Smith wrote:
> I think knowing how the suckless tools are being distributed is useful
> for certain people on this list. For example I'd like to be told if
> dmenu's packaging changes significantly without having to subscribe to
> the mailing list for e
Hey,
On 19 October 2010 20:15, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> Each distribution should have their own discussion about this on their
> own lists, so we don't have to listen to to it. dwm is licensed such
> that we don't have to give a damn how they patch the software.
I think knowing how the suckless to
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
> Using a package manager makes it easier to work around broken software (e.g.
> gdm). Even though gdm conflicts with dwm's philosophy, if people want to use
> it so badly, there is no point in making it harder for them.
gdm already includes
> Using a package manager makes it easier to work around broken software (e.g.
> gdm). Even though gdm conflicts with dwm's philosophy, if people want to use
> it so badly, there is no point in making it harder for them.
No point in putting a bandaid on a flesh wound. If someone is so
masochistic
Excerpts from Kurt H Maier's message of Tue Oct 19 17:42:34 +0200 2010:
> Relying on a package manager for dwm does not make any sense at all to
> begin with. It says this on the project homepage. Please hold
> packaging discussions on the respective distro packagers' lists, since
> it has nothin
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:33 AM, TJ Robotham wrote:
> If a user is modifying dwm.c, I think that they've crossed the threshold where
> relying on a package manager for dwm has ceased to make any sense at all.
Relying on a package manager for dwm does not make any sense at all to
begin with. It
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 05:02:02PM +0200, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
> Petr, as most users also need to patch dwm.c to make dwm fit their needs, this
> seems pointless to me... maybe you should also respect dwm.c if it's put in
> ~/.dwm?
> that way, one can also just extract the mainline tarball or clo
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 05:02:02PM +0200, Moritz Wilhelmy wrote:
> Excerpts from Anselm R Garbe's message of Tue Oct 19 15:14:15 +0200 2010:
> > If this is part of the fedora package I'd be very happy with this.
> I think that's what he's talking about
>
> Petr, as most users also need to patch dw
Excerpts from Anselm R Garbe's message of Tue Oct 19 15:14:15 +0200 2010:
> If this is part of the fedora package I'd be very happy with this.
I think that's what he's talking about
Petr, as most users also need to patch dwm.c to make dwm fit their needs, this
seems pointless to me... maybe you sh
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 8:39 AM, Don Harper wrote:
> Can you just grow up, instead?
Thanks for the top-posted advice, Don Harper, RHCE
--
# Kurt H Maier
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 01:14:15PM +, Anselm R Garbe wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 03:11:05PM +0200, Petr Sabata wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:23:56PM +, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> > > I understand that you software packagers are a special breed, and
> > > having even one binary not s
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 03:11:05PM +0200, Petr Sabata wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:23:56PM +, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> > I understand that you software packagers are a special breed, and
> > having even one binary not subject to the rigors of packaging can
> > cause you to lose sleep, but e
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 12:23:56PM +, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> I understand that you software packagers are a special breed, and
> having even one binary not subject to the rigors of packaging can
> cause you to lose sleep, but every time you people pull this shit we
> get an influx of idiots in i
Can you just grow up, instead?
On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 7:23 AM, Kurt H Maier wrote:
> I understand that you software packagers are a special breed, and
> having even one binary not subject to the rigors of packaging can
> cause you to lose sleep, but every time you people pull this shit we
> get
I understand that you software packagers are a special breed, and
having even one binary not subject to the rigors of packaging can
cause you to lose sleep, but every time you people pull this shit we
get an influx of idiots in irc, spamming about how they can patch dwm
to act like fluxbox, patch f
On 10/19/2010 11:41 AM, Petr Sabata wrote:
> There's also a dwm-user subpackage which installs dwm sources
> and dwm-start script; this:
> - checks for ~/.dwm/config.h; if it's present, the script builds a custom
>user dwm and installs it into ~/.dwm/dwm
> - checks for ~/.dwm/dwm and runs it
Hi list,
I'd just like to announce I've packaged dwm for Fedora, releases 12+. It
should arrive in repositories soon.
The default package contains precompiled binary with almost unchanged dwm
default config. There's also a dwm-user subpackage which installs dwm sources
and dwm-start script; this:
17 matches
Mail list logo
